Pages

Monday, March 29, 2010

Former PM of Nepal Makes Sense

Former Nepali PM Krishna Prasad Bhattarai has called for the restoration of the (monarchist) 1990 Constitution. You can read the full story at the Telegraph Nepal. The former prime minister said that, "Federalism, republican order and secularism are against the national order". Truer words were never spoken. The 1990 Constitution allowed for democracy but also a central role for the monarchy and recognized Hinduism as the official state religion of Nepal.

I wish I could disagree but I am afraid you are right. Recent history, and the present day, shows that this disease survives or keeps coming back again and again or is pushed by more and more social elites even if they go about it in a more gradual and deceptive way than the Maoists in Nepal. Communism killed roughly 100 million people in the last century and yet many are still going for it. That is one reason why I am not terribly impressed by the accusations made against anti-communist forces in the numerous civil wars around the world. It really is like a disease.

Communism appeals to the Academic world, because of the smoothness of the Theory and how it Promises to Realise the Dream given to us in the Enlightenment of a True Democracy. It is also "Newer" than the Old Order and many take on a Lenier progressionmodel for the Human Race, in which the old order of Monarhcy was gradually displaced by a COnstitutional Monarhcy, and hten by Repoublicanism, which eventually leads ot the Promised Society of Equals as Envisioned by the Enlightenments thinkers, who in turn inspired Marx.

The Ideals of the COmmunists also took hold because of COmmunist Infiltration in the Universities in the 1930's,1950's, and 1960's. (In the 1940's they were too Busy Fightign the Naitonal Socialists.)

Even though opreasent day Teachers weren't part of this Infiltraiton, they still had thei rminds shaped by the Radicalism of the 1960's and the Appeal of a Revlution, with its glory, action, and comelltey overturn of society, and withthe end goal of realisign this new and better society and new and better Humanity never really left them.

Its, in fact, the entire operational Philosophy, along with the Idea of Democracy itself, or the idea of how Religion has caused nothign but oppresison so we need Seperation of Churh and State and a Secular society (WHich Ironiclly is now its own Religion, albeit one that refuses to admit it is such) has become somethign no one Questions. In fact your not allowed to Question it. it is a Self-evident truth that can't be Challenged.

Its just assumed. Peopel think in these terms and never quesiton the underlying assumptions.

It is when they begin to quesiton it that we will see advancement to the proper way.

True, which was part of why I got out of the education game -didn't need the money, didn't like the headaches and didn't like being surrounded by Marxists. There was a history professor, nice enough man, knew his stuff front and back but a perfect example of the product of the People's Republic of China educational system. I knew I could stand no more when this otherwise intelligent individual said that Chairman Mao was "not such a bad guy" but that the Dalai Lama was "a dangerous counterrevolutionary". Anyone who can say such a thing has obviously parted company with reality. But, no sense in pointing it out, these people after all don't want to be confused with the facts.

Indeed, the attractiveness and neatness of theory is a large part of why many people become scientists.

However, natural philosophers know that the reality is always more complicated than the models and theories they create to explain the world around us. Theories are postulated, and then everyone tries to disprove them by examining the evidence. That is the scientific method (and the evidence should closely match the theory if the theory is to be accepted).

Such a process is not followed in the political arena though, and thus, the neat theory becomes unfalsifiable. Many who pursue these theories fail to see their own hypocrisy, and it is an abuse to claim rationality for such proposals.

That, I suppose, is part of why I want to write fiction. I want to subvert everyone's expectations, deconstruct the ideology of Marxism (though to do that, I'll need to get off my bum and do some research), the idea of democracy as a universal panacea, and so on, and reconstruct the ideas of monarchy and aristocracy as worthy things. Certainly, I'll be sticking with much more fantastical things with less of this deconstruction in what I'm aiming for publication in the near future, but I have a broadside to fire. I'm just waiting for the uproll.

With no offense to Science, I am studying Psycology. I've met Scientists. They aren't all intereste in Altruism and truth. One reason the Neo-Atheists who prattle on about Scientists doesnt work with me.

Often they exclude evidence hat doesn't fot the theory, rather than the other way round, and in the end try to promote a Theory base don their private Philosophical or Political beelifs, or worse, for money.